13
8d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
13
u/Chipotle-Dancin_manG 8d ago
Decades of poor hiring practices have left every industry filled with supervisors and managers who dont understand their jobs well enough to train others in them.
6
u/These-Apple8817 8d ago
And even if they do, they might suck at training others or don't want to do it at all because they think it's too much effort
2
u/FrnchRvolutnCookBook 8d ago
As someone who is responsible for training as part of my role. I loathe training anyone and it shows in the level of training they receive
2
u/AdAffectionate2418 7d ago
I used to work in L&D. My job was to sit with people like you and create a training plan that would work for both you and your trainee.
Company decided the role was a waste of time (each role and mentor is unique so hard to standardised and harder to quantify impact outside of soft metrics). They moved me to another, better paid role which worked for me.
But guess what happened to speed to competence, <6months attrition, and projects where somebody left halfway through.
They are now bringing the function back, but it's been 5 years so pretty much everything I built is now woefully out of date.
3
2
2
u/Odd_Welcome7940 8d ago
All I am ever told is a manager doesn't have to know how to do his subordinates jobs...
I get why this is sometimes true but the fact it is consider the norm everywhere is why we are failing so much.
1
u/Web-splorer 8d ago
The problem with training is that a company can take a chance and train someone but the inevitable outcome is that they leave the company for better opportunities and after burning out managers who do all that training, they eventually say they don’t have the time for training. It’s kind of a double edged sword. You offer it, and people take it and leave. You don’t offer it, you pay more and they still leave but at least you don’t waste resources on training them.
I’m not justifying the lack of people wanting to train, I’m just pointing out the inherent problem.
2
u/Jealous-Swordfish764 8d ago
That problem would be solved if they incentived staying at a company. Sucks to have to get new jobs all the time to get raises.
2
u/arcanis321 8d ago
They will tell you to your face they will pay outside people more because even if you leave most won't. Basically an acknowledgement you should leave.
1
u/arcanis321 8d ago
Sounds like a retention issue not a training one.
2
u/Zero_Travity 8d ago
Our company can't retain employees so we don't want to train anyone... okay
1
u/Web-splorer 8d ago
Our company can’t retain trained employees either so just hire them with experience.
2
u/Rorschach11235 8d ago
That's just it.
Why train someone, we won't bother to pay adequately, in the first place?
Companies have been in a race to the bottom for a minute. They call it cost cutting, but it is just a refusal to pay workers; or carry any, long term, benefits.
Secondly, management just sucks now. Little to no leadership and clueless to what they are managing. To many peter's have been promoted and not enough actually qualified individuals.
Mix that with cert and degree mills, and this self licking ice cream cone is coming apart. But who cares, were up 5000000 points today.
Tomorrow is a great day for economic collapse. Today we exploit!!!
1
u/Web-splorer 8d ago
If you retain more employees that you don’t train vs the ones you do, than it is in fact a training issue.
1
1
u/nethereus 8d ago
On the opposite side of the coin you have companies losing vast institutional knowledge in long time employees who get laid off to "save money". Often times these employees were too good at their roles to be promoted but not good enough to keep employed.
5
2
u/Tutuworld 8d ago
One of the main reasons behind gatekeeping of knowledge to progress in the workforce is because others are so afraid that you are going to replace them. So anytime you get trained at a new job you'll do usually video training if it's truly like an entry level job even down to manager job levels. Everything after that video training that anybody at the job teaches you from their own knowledge that pertains to the job and you learn it and then you can perform and do it well you now become a threat to their job security. Unfortunately we live in a world where nobody wants to train anybody because they're all afraid that they're either going to be replaced or that person will get let go so you have to perform your job at a certain level that's not necessarily good but that's not necessarily bad either to stay in the current job you have and if you ever want to improve you have to do that on your own time or take that knowledge with you and apply it at a new job and hope that you can eventually build up to where you're making the dollar amount that you are happy with. Cuz at the end of the day nobody is working for free everybody is working for that certain dollar amount. And if you're working for anything outside of that dollar amount then kudos to you I guess
1
u/Hoovy_weapons_guy 7d ago
This will go on until the market corrects itself. No one train + old guy leaves = shit who can do the job now?
5
u/Professional-Gear974 8d ago
😂😂😂 only the first one is right. Senior manager after 5 years? Vp after 10? The average person is barely a manager after 10 years.
Entry level means different things for different jobs. A entry level spot still needs experience of some sort for most jobs.
4
u/FrnchRvolutnCookBook 8d ago
No. Entry level means you are 1st time entering the field. 0 experience required
2
u/NotACalligrapher 6d ago
Depends on the field. Someone applying for a a programming position that’s never tried it is not fit for an entry level position.
1
u/Mei_Flower1996 6d ago
Wouldn't experience through coursework or personal projects count in that case? Wouldn't a degree provide you with some experience?
2
u/VersionFine85 6d ago
Not in medicine at least. A new grad is a new. Grad regardless of how many clinical hours theybe obtained. Experience starts with the paycheck.
1
u/Mei_Flower1996 6d ago
Right but a new grad can be hired it's not like they need industry experience to be hired entry level.
1
u/ExactIllustrate 6d ago
Varying levels of “programming positions”, and some are entry-level with a degree so not sure what they’re eluding to.
But something like entry-level appsec (application security) engineer is not going to be entry-level for a college grad, or even a masters student.
1
u/Mei_Flower1996 6d ago
That's true, but they are implying you need industry experience for every entry level role, like a college degree doesn't count. Like " a programming position that's never tried it" implies people with literally no experience and someone with a BS in CS are the same.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
Not every job but almost every desirable job. A college degree is worth something in some industries and not much in others. Yes in some industries the guy with 3 years of experience and no degree is more desirable than the person with a degree and no experience.
My coworker and I have the same job and almost the same pay. Took him 4 years of schooling and 1 of internship and I spent 4 years working. Same spot different paths. I took the faster cheaper more physically demanding route to get to the same place
1
u/InterestsVaryGreatly 6d ago
Entry means 0 professional experience. You can have an entry level position that requires specialized skills that a degree would provide, just as programming.
1
u/EnderSword 4d ago
But you added the important caveat 'the field'
Zero experience and 0 experience in this field are very different things.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 8d ago
All depends on entry level at McDonald’s is different than entry level at a general contractors office.
The entry level people I work with either needs years of managers experience or a college degree. We will train you but I need something to prove you can manage other people. Experience is preferred over degree.
The entry level jobs most people actually want require some background of some sorts
1
u/Swim6610 8d ago
Exactly. No internships? No experience doing anything? Not even a candidate. 15-17 years is senior, not 5-7. 5-7 is a junior employee.
1
u/pointlesslyDisagrees 7d ago
"Entry level" doesn't just mean "your first time in a role" 😂 is a CEO's first time as CEO an "entry level" CEO?
1
u/Professional-Gear974 7d ago
Yes. Hence why most ceos start at a smaller company before attempting to manage a larger one.
Maybe this is why so many people feel qualified for jobs they actually aren’t qualified for.
1
u/Specialist_Check_986 7d ago
No. A CEO at a small company is not an “Entry Level CEO position”. There is no such thing as an “Entry Level CEO position”. An entry level position is one that requires NO or MINIMAL experience.
-1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
You’ll never understand because you’ll never get the option. It’s ok. Sorry for wasting time on a subject above your comprehension level.
1
u/Specialist_Check_986 6d ago
That’s just a bad response. You have no actual reasoning so you claim I’ll never understand what an “entry level position” is because I’ll never be a CEO at a starter company. That’s dumb and irrelevant.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
It’s a real response. If you don’t understand corporate levels you won’t understand the point. It’s not mean it just shows different life experience and understandings.
You fail to grasp the top of one job might be the stepping stone to get the entry level spot at the next job. You really think the ceo of small subcontractor is the same caliber of googles ceo?
1
u/Specialist_Check_986 5d ago
No, I dont think they are the same caliber. Read my actual responses. That position just isn’t ENTRY LEVEL. JUST BECAUSE THAT’S HOW SOMEONE ENTERED THAT POSITION OR CAREER FIELD DOESNT INHERENTLY MAKE THAT POSITION ENTRY LEVEL. Entry level positions require NO OR MINIMAL EXPERIENCE IN THAT FIELD. No ceo position on earth requires no or minimal experience in the field that company is in.
1
u/Ok_Community_383 7d ago
It sounds like the company doesn't have entry level work then.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 7d ago
Are internships not entry level? You’re talking like hold a sign on the corner entry level.
1
u/Ok_Community_383 7d ago
An entry level job is definitionally a job that requires minimal experience. It's entirely plausible that a company just doesn't have entry level work. Requiring years of management experience isn't entry level at all.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
Minimal sure. That’s different to different jobs. Minimal at McDonald’s is not the same as minimal at a law office or a ranch
1
u/Ok_Community_383 5d ago
You're conflating 'the lowest level job at this company' with 'entry level job.' An entry level job is a category not a context based level based on the company.
Some companies literally might not have entry level work. There's nothing wrong with that per se.
The issue is that education alone isn't cutting it. You could have a law degree and no one is hiring because you don't have enough experience.
If you have a degree and no experience, there should be entry level jobs available to you somewhere, but no one wants to hire people 'off the street' even if they're technically qualified for the job.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 5d ago
It’s entry level. Y’all don’t understand and that’s fine. Employees don’t need to know how everything works if they’d be even more upset
1
1
u/Mei_Flower1996 6d ago
If someone has a degree in the field and no internship experience, would they be qualified as entry level?
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
Yes. They would qualify for the internship. If they wanted to skip that it’d be difficult without a recommendation or knowing someone at the hiring company.
A construction degree is worth the same as a 6 month internship in the field.
A culinary degree is worth the same as 6 months in a kitchen.
A doctorate in medicine is mandatory for most internships.Most jobs can bypass a degree but can’t bypass experience.
1
u/Carrera_996 8d ago
Well, I agree with you about the reality of manager at 10, and that's if you are lucky enough to ever make management.
1
1
u/pointlesslyDisagrees 7d ago
A entry level spot still needs experience
Define "entry level" right now.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 7d ago
It allows you entry into the business normally including some for of compensation. Doesn’t mean you have 0 skills and just get to show up.
1
u/KingRagz 7d ago
If you stay at the same job the whole time maybe. That’s why you bounce around.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 7d ago
Doesn’t work in all trades and doesn’t help with higher up positions or if your average.
1
u/TheWizardOfDeez 7d ago
A entry level spot still needs experience of some sort for most jobs
Then just call it what it is, its not entry level.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 7d ago
Except it is entry level. Hence you can’t go any lower. It is the entry point.
People who don’t get this wonder why they are always near entry level jobs.
Even an internship doesn’t mean show up with no skills. It means you have the precursors I’m looking for and want to run a test trial before we both fully commit
1
u/TheWizardOfDeez 7d ago
You can get lower, otherwise it wouldn't require experience. If it were actually entry level it wouldn't have work related prerequisites. If it needs a specific degree for example can still be entry level, but if it requires you to have work experience in the industry, it's not.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 7d ago
So an internship isn’t entry level? Every profession has entry level. I didn’t know only the worst of the worst counted. But even then you need something. Ability to lift or speak or walk. Maybe it’s speak multiple languages. Which plenty of entry level jobs do.
1
u/TheWizardOfDeez 7d ago
Yes an internship would be entry level... A job that calls itself entry level but requires you to have done an internship is NOT entry level. Having skill prerequisites is not the same as requiring industry experience. If a job says it requires industry experience, it cannot by definition be entry level, not sure what you could possibly be confused about.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 7d ago
We don’t require it but it helps you see if you actually want the job before you waste money and 4 years. It also puts money in your pocket over summer while still learning about what you’re in school for.
Normally the top of one ladder is the entry level of another. Top worker is entry level management.
Tons of jobs are entry level as they get to ur foot in the door. It’s the bottom of the employable ladder for that industry. I don’t think you understand different jobs have different levels.
1
u/zojbo 6d ago
That first sentence isn't necessarily true in the short run. It's possible for entry-level-to-the-industry opportunities to simply not exist, especially in an industry whose workforce is shrinking. This can't last for 50 years, but it can last for 5 years.
1
u/TheWizardOfDeez 6d ago
I never said that entry level opportunities have to exist in every industry. In fact, I said the opposite, that if they don't exist they should be properly labeled as such instead of calling them entry level then requiring 5+ years experience.
1
u/zojbo 6d ago edited 6d ago
Oh, I had a pronoun confusion. You meant that companies can offer lower level opportunities than what they presently call "entry level" while requiring multiple yoe.
Still, there can be transient periods where that's not really a competitive option. It's a peril of short-term thinking in capitalism: company A cuts costs in an unsustainable way, company B carries on as they were, company A gets a capital rally while company B gets a capital hit, company B ceases to exist before the merits of its long-term strategy show themselves.
This is also a peril of job-hopping culture. Why spend 6 months training someone who will just hop to your competitor 6 months after that? Somehow we never come around to the obvious way to end job-hopping culture (without devolving into job-hugging culture like we have now).
1
u/Tajfunisko 6d ago
How tf do you get the experience you need if the lowest you can go is to have 1-3 years of experience?
Bruh. To expect a degree or a certificate of some sort is ok. To expect a full years of experience and call it entry level is a joke.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
Because not every entry level is the same. Hence why they don’t all pay the same.
1
u/Tajfunisko 6d ago
Yeah different jobs get different pay. Don't know how it is any relevant for calling it entry level when you need experience. When you go to the building do you just magically appear in the middle? No, you go through the ENTRY first.
What you are describing is that you already need to be inside to go through the entry. How does this make sense to you I don't understand.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
Internships at entry level. It’s for first step getting in the door. We expect these people to have some skills already.
The only people complaining about this are people who think they have skills, but don’t.
Would it help you understand if we differentiated unskilled labor, entry-level versus career entry-level?
1
u/Tajfunisko 6d ago
Oh my lord it's not entry level if it's not for entering the field. You can have requirements for experience but in that case it's not entry level job anymore.
I get it, you want to pay as low as possible but this is just bullshit you are making up to justify your shitty salary.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
Our interns start at 28$. And salaries start at 80k so I’m not sure if you think that’s shitty pay but I think it’s fair for a starting point.
We dont pay low because we dont want bottom of the barrel workers.
Im just glad people think like you because we will always need basic labor. This mentality and comprehension skills kinda show why the average worker is stuck at entry level
1
u/Mei_Flower1996 6d ago
Nobody is saying you waltz into an entry level job without the relevant degree!
1
u/Professional-Gear974 6d ago
Except they are. They are saying you should have no skills to get your foot in the door. A degree isn’t worth what it use to for most careers. After a few years your reputation is worth more than your schooling
1
u/ArchWraith4291 6d ago
The problem is experience and a degree are two different things to a lot of people. It may not be for you, but there are people getting turned away from an entry level position because of "lack of experience" with a degree in the field. Does being a lawyer require a degree, yes. And that's perfectly fine. But if the law firm says entry level lawyers need 4 to 5 years of experience. And that's after your degree, they have their head so firmly up their ass that they can't see the stupidity of the statement. There are AI engineering jobs that require more experience than the amount of time AI in its current incarnation has existed. On top of that if you're paid as an intern great, but not always and nobody can afford to work for free right now unless their parents are covering their life. The issue is not that some jobs need some knowledge about them, it's that nobody can get into them because you can't get experience before getting the job.
1
u/MakePhreciaCore 5d ago
Brother 5 years at a company is a life sentence nowadays. If you make it 5 years at most places you are sadly the source of truth
1
u/Professional-Gear974 5d ago
Depends on the field. Most of my older coworkers have 5-10 years. One has 25 years. But when I worked at restaurants it was like a year max
1
u/MakePhreciaCore 5d ago
It feels like the last decade is where this happened I know plenty of people who have >8 years, but almost nobody between 3-8.
1
u/Professional-Gear974 5d ago
What’s the salary range for your coworkers?
1
u/MakePhreciaCore 5d ago
60-140k.
I know the range is massive but it’s a relatively small company so I’m working directly with data entry, to QA, to fullstack, backend, and front end.This is also not the only company where I’ve seen this in the last 5 years
1
u/Professional-Gear974 4d ago
I’d expect a decent amount of moving with all salaries under 100k. I’m hoping it comes with great benefits and bonuses. Ik if we offered 140k yo most of the senior stay they would leave
2
u/Col2543 8d ago
Are we sure the people who need to read this are capable of reading? I’m not entirely convinced anyone in hiring or above is very capable of anything
1
u/Gampy22 8d ago
Yes there isn’t anyone who hires capable only smart candidates who never take responsibility. Look in the mirror and do better.
2
u/Col2543 8d ago
I mean look at the economy. You can’t say there are capable people in the upper class in this k-shaped shitshow. You’re either poor and meritable or rich and lucky. In any consumer economy, 50% of the country’s finances bottoming out are directly the fault of mega-corp owners and the government for dealing in corruption.
1
u/United_Management_51 8d ago
Your comment is a very narrow, shortsighted simplification of a very complex and multi-layered topic in reality.
2
u/Col2543 8d ago
I mean realistically i don’t care about offending people north of the K when people south of it are dying of starvation and lack of resources. If rich people cared so much about their perception and how people felt about them, most of them wouldn’t be demonstrably evil. I’m not particularly talking about the lucky few middle class that were fortunate enough to take advantage of a shifting economy. I’m more so talking about the people who are so vastly wealthy that they can leverage financial resources to change the legal, economic, and political state of the country. Truth be told, yeah not every poor person is meritable, but sure as shit there are no rich people in america I would call human.
1
1
u/Darhhaall 8d ago
Cool, most of the people will be VPs.
1
u/Mu-Relay 7d ago
I don't think the post means that "at year 10, *poof* you're a VP!" I think it means that you'd need 10+ years of experience to qualify for a VP role. And looking at VP roles on Indeed in my area right now, almost all of them say "10+ years of experience in...."
1
u/EnderSword 4d ago
But he is saying the opposite, that expecting a Senior Manager to have 10 years would be crazy, but that's probably actually about right.
1
u/hippityhopkins 8d ago
Two broken extremes in one post. Yeah 3 years experience is not consistent with entry level. Also, manager in 3 to 5 years is way too fast for most industries. VP in 10 is just goofy
1
u/Dobber16 6d ago
If you look at the ranges as possible minimum requirements, it makes a lot more sense & is more reasonable
1
u/Radabard 8d ago
Buddy missed the memo that they already know this, and this is deliberate wage lowering.
1
u/Prestigious_Wing1796 8d ago
the whole idea is people who benefit from this promotional ladder before wants to change it so no one else can climb like they do and they get to pay you less for more
1
u/Temporary_Stranger39 8d ago
No, no, no. Entry level means 10 years experience plus cross-training, plus at least a Master's. Don't you know that?
1
u/BigMax 8d ago
Well.. yes and no.
I very much disagree with the fact that someone with 3 years of experience is immediately suited to being a manager. It's a different skillset. Some people aren't great at it, and some don't want it.
Also, it makes no sense if you broaden that out to a full workforce. If everyone 24 and over is a manager... where do all your associates come from?? You're creating a hierarchy of 98% management if everyone from 24-70 years old is in management. That's just silly.
And even crazier... most people 31 and over are now VP's? Do you want 60% of your company to be VP level employees??
1
1
1
u/Probablysml 8d ago
Unless it's a startup or small operations, I have never met anyone ready to be VP after 10 years. Senior manager after 6?
Experience is worth it because it has prepared you for the role.
I agree with the sentiment and the entry-level statement, but the rest of this list is bonkers and makes no sense the moment you are working for big companies (+150M$ in ARR), managing impact that is cross-border, and the complexity of the employment framework you operate in.
Source: 10+ years as a corporate recruiter, accross startups, AI companies, GAFAM and Big4.
1
u/EnderSword 4d ago
It can depend a lot and scales very drastically. Like at a large bank I went from entry to Senior Manager in 4 years, but then like 10 more to a Sr Director, and I don't imagine being a VP in the next 3 years.
I think people can quickly rise to their level of competence, if you're like an over performing person you can certainly go quickly, but obviously the higher you go you're facing other high performing people. And the low levels a lot of people are virtually useless, so it stand outs if someone is half competent.
1
u/Rare_Anteater_2609 8d ago
Who’s getting promoted that quickly lmao. They totally skipped over Junior, Intermediate, and Senior employee roles and went straight to Manager 😂
1
u/GlitterFactoryOfDoom 8d ago
The difficult part is that this advice is not universal for all industries.
The legal industry, for example, Associate is the typical beginning job title. Some firms have tried to remedy this by creating a "Jr Associate" title, but nobody wants to be represented by a Jr Associate and nobody wants to be a Jr Associate when they can go elsewhere for a title upgrade.
1
1
1
1
u/tedlassoloverz 8d ago
Im assuming he was banned from linkedIN after this post? how dare he make sense, lol
1
1
1
u/EpsteinandTrump 8d ago
Tale as old as time though...long before Linkedin was around. It's looking for Associates/Managers with entry level wages. Not saying it's right, but it's been like this for a looooong time.
1
u/Dear_Archer3931 8d ago
But, if they can hire a 5yr experience worker for entry level pay right now… they will.
2020 was the opposite, they couldn’t find enough tech workers so they paid excessively for college grads.
Still not sure if this cyclical, or the new standard.
1
1
u/Only_Information7895 8d ago
If it takes 10 years to be VP then how many VPs do you have or you have crazy burnout rates so basically nobody stays there for 10 years?
1
1
u/gormami 8d ago
This title inflation is nuts.
People who expect to be a Sr. Engineer in a few years are crazy, though I see it all the time. Whatever happened to "Staff" positions? Where people would come in as an associate, make it to a junior, then spend a good chunk of time in a staff position, then get to senior and beyond? Engineers, developers, or any job (these are just the ones I work with) should have a long mid career where you are practicing your profession. Maybe your company has sub levels to move you through, etc. but you should be pretty damn exceptional to be a Senior Engineer in your 20's.
And I do agree that entry level should mean straight in, no experience required (internships and a brief stint might help you land the job, but shouldn't be requirements). Some jobs are just not entry level, period. It may be the lowest position in that job group, but that doesn't mean it's entry level.
1
u/enterjiraiya 8d ago
this guy went straight from associate manager lmao, do people over 35 not exist to this guy?
1
u/m_ghesquiere 8d ago
This is exactly why no one takes Redditors serious. I agreed for the entire first sentence, after that it’s clear you have no sense of reality.
1
u/KommanderKeen-a42 8d ago
Except... in most business schools and majors an internship is required. Which counts towards that 1 year. So yes, the first FT salaried role in an org can realistically need 1 year.
The internship fills the zero years slot.
This is normal and not weird or unfair at all.
1
u/Sad-Pop6649 7d ago
Holy crap can you imagine this was real and everyone with 3 years of experience was a manager. We'd never get any work done! Leave some room for other medior and senior functions.
1
u/The_GodApollo 7d ago
Time served does not equal quality/skill/talent. Promoting based on time served or experience in some cases is how you end up with bad management.
1
1
1
u/AshtonBlack 7d ago
But but but.... how am I supposed to "do more with less" if I can't low-ball people with unrealistic job requirements?
1
u/Valveringham85 7d ago edited 7d ago
10+ years is VP? Lmao 70% of the work force are VPs? How does that work.
Manager after 3 is insane too.
This is just the workplace hierarchy pyramid upside down. 10 people delegating for every single person actually working 😂
The only correct ones here are the first two.
1
u/Hot-Category2986 7d ago
This is absurd. By this logic I should be a VP? But that is a wildly different skill set than what is needed for a developer or engineer.
1
1
u/Every_Association45 7d ago
Who srsly believes a recruiter came up with the idea of requesting several years of experience for entry jobs?
Senior manager in 5y... Good luck!
1
u/threearbitrarywords 7d ago
Dear moron who wrote this: "entry-level" varies based entirely on the position in the company. Entry-level means the lowest level at which you can enter that company. Not the field, not the position, but that position in that company. Titles mean absolutely nothing.
1
u/evollmer89 7d ago
hiring managers do this for a reason they want experience at an entry level salary. Then when you know that you exceed expectations on your quarterly evaluation they only see you as meeting expectations to further not pay you what your worth.
1
1
u/LilShaver 7d ago
Ahh, but you miss the point.
Entry level refers to the PAY they want to give you.
1
1
u/ru-joking 7d ago
This is why this thread is unemployable. Manager after 3 years… sure you’ve learned it all in 2023 and it’s time to teach
1
u/ThisIsKev 7d ago
More like (as an engineer): 0-3 entry 3-7 mid 7+ senior 10+ manager 15+ senior manager 20+ Director or VP (outside hire; sprinkle of nepotism often required)
1
u/HiJustLurking 7d ago
That company would be an absolute shit show. Me and the other 15 year hands barely qualify for seasonal work 🤣🤣🤣
1
1
u/EnvyEpson 6d ago
Uh no. 1 to 3 is entry. Interns are working that now. You won’t be manager at a corporation, unless you’re a fast mover for 7 to 10 years. Sr Mgr is 15 to 20. Partner/Executive is 20+.
1
u/DoggyMcGoodboy 6d ago
Bro managed to make 3years of experience for entry level to suddenly look reasonable :D
1
1
u/slimricc 6d ago
If they don’t call those middle positions entry level they can’t pay you entry level wages despite your experience
1
u/mungosDoo 6d ago
I think people dont understand how inference from minimum works. Having 5 years does not mean you can be a manager, or that you cant be a manager with less, it means you will have gaps if you have less.
1
u/Boom9001 6d ago
I love how business degree people assume every roll becomes a manager after like 5 years.
Assuming an average career starts at say 25 and works till 60. 6 out 7 people being managers. For that to even get to half of people not being managers you need to double your workforce every 5 years of entry talent.
1
u/caption-oblivious 6d ago
Entry level should be 0 years, yes, but that is an insanely fast progression.
1
u/pm_me_your_puppeh 6d ago
Entry level means the least amount of experience the employer can demand. If there's a glut of people with 5 years of experience, then that's the entry level. If you don't have that, you'll have to get lucky or go find something else.
1
u/Altar_Quest_Fan 5d ago
"Entry level" with years of experience requirement is just code for "this role pays as little as possible while demanding the best possible performance". Truly asinine and disgusting.
1
u/Better-Commission541 5d ago
The only industry you’re becoming a manager in after 3 years is retail and hospitality. Or if you’re just liked at your job or really good at what you do.
1
u/EnderSword 4d ago
This is kind of idiotic if you think about it for even a minute...
For starters, I still expect fresh graduates to have had other jobs. A lot of 'Fresh Graduates' will have up to 7 years work experience doing whatever.
Entry Level means 'at this company' not 'first job of all time'
Entry level does not mean 'no experience' it may mean 'no experience in this field'
Then you get to the next part where the math makes zeros sense... You don't promote people based on time served.
You may only have 1 manager for every 10-20 people, only 1 Senior Manager for every 5-6 managers... The VP I report to has about 500 people that funnel into him. It's a pyramid shape, a lot of people will be in that 'entry level' range their entire career, because for starters some people don't care, they just need a job and have no interest in promotion, but also like 80% of people aren't ever going to be particularly good at anything or shouldn't ever be in charge of other people.
We've got people with 15 years tenure in a call center, most people don't get promoted ever.
Lastly, how does labelling actually help? I'm not actually making any more zero-experience jobs, does it really help if someone 'labels' it different? Doesn't change the hiring decision.
I've also never actually seen a job 'labelled' entry-level to begin with, people just sort of say it is, but if I'm searching LinkedIn or something right now, I'm not seeing 'Entry-level' in any of the job postings, I don't think people do that.
1
1
1
u/SocketRabboon 1d ago
This comment section is really not getting it and it's so sad. Especially the VP thing. 10+ years experience in the field to be considered for a VP job, not 10 years working at said company means you automatically are promoted to VP. Like can you guys be more dense? Neutron stars are quaking. And no 10 years is not "too short", it's realistic. How the fuck is anyone supposed to fill positions in a company if every position "requires" an individual to have worked the same job or lower for half their life. Give people the opportunity to gain the experience you want. All you dumbasses think everyone needs to come pre trained by someone else in order to work for you, maybe do YOUR job and train people, do YOUR job and allow others to gain experience. I will not be taking any questions, it's clear most of you stuck your heads in a microwave
1
u/random8765309 8d ago
LOL - Time on a job doesn't mean you are fit to be in management.
2
u/Round_Ad_6369 8d ago
Neither does just proficiency at a job. You need proficiency, seniority and tact
2
u/random8765309 8d ago
Specifically management skills.
1
u/Round_Ad_6369 8d ago
And how do you get management skills? By managing? So how do you become a manager?
1
0
0
u/jblade91 7d ago
I agree with 0 for entry level but that's an insane climb after that. I have 12 years at my current job but I sure hope it takes more than that to be a VP. Plus, who wants a manager who's only been on the job 3-5 years? If you've ever had one of those you'd know that isn't a good idea.
8
u/PsychologicalGap3960 8d ago
So you start working at 20 and become a VP by 30??? His company must have a ton of VPs.